Relay tx post DSO - why only 3 muxes?

Angus Rae wrote:
If you happen to be on or below the south slope of a large hill

I mean "north slope" here of course. If you're on a south-facing slope
there's no issue. D'oh.

--
Angus G Rae Science & Engineering Support Team
Computing Services
University of Edinburgh
The above opinions are mine, and Edinburgh University can't have them

2Bdecided wrote:


This is clearly one argument that has been put forward.

It falls down for a number of reasons.

Firstly, the broadcaster (e.g. Dave, Film4, Virgin etc) is not the
multiplex owner, and did not choose the coverage of the multiplex. The
situation is far more complex, with more intermediaries, and it's not
a free market. viewer broadcaster mux operator OfCom I think.
The mux operator, where it is separate from the provider of the
physical broadcast location and equipment, also have a relationship
with that entity - that being the entity that initially bares the
cost.


The decision was made by NGW in Warwick before it merged with Arqiva.
I understand it was based on equipment cost per head of population in
the intended service area. The same economics were used by the BBC
planning section years ago for justification of building relays.

The PSB multiplexes are more financially viable and make much more money
for a transmitter operator than a commercial multiplex ever will.
Even the equipment being installed at the transmitter sites for the COM
multiplexes is different to that being used for the three PSB multiplexes,
again a decision made by NGW before it merged with Arqiva.


Obviously extra expenditure reduces profit (or increases loss), but
I'm not sure Arqiva are on the brink of bankruptcy.


Arqiva is owned Australian banking concern MacQuarie, they are rolling
in cash, unlike our own UK banks which get given cash by our own government
to bail them out of bad investments. Macquarie own loads of profitable
businesses around the UK and abroad.

Mark Carver wrote:

cough

SFNs ?

/cough

Well yes, but why aren't they doing them for all MUXs?

There must be a reason the powers that be aren't keen on them otherwise
there would be a load of SFNs and they'd be selling off more spectrum!

On 14 Apr, 13:32, Jerry wrote:
2Bdecided wrote:

Ah yes, all true, but I'm moving from a well served location to a non-
served location. I feel the only option is Sky - I will definitely
miss my subscription-free PVR, and would miss the likes of Yesterday,
Film4, various radio stations, and even Sky News.

So get a FTA satellite receiver, no need for "Sky" (or even Freesat
for that matter...), go find a clue rather than ranting on Usenet!

I realise CH4 is now FTA, but my understanding is that five isn't, and
several of the other channels on Freeview aren't either.

Most importantly, I though that the generic FTA satellite PVRs _don't_
have a working EPG when used in the UK. True or false?

Cheers,
David.

On 14 Apr, 16:52, Stuart wrote:
Mark Carver wrote:

cough

SFNs ?

/cough

Well yes, but why aren't they doing them for all MUXs?

There must be a reason the powers that be aren't keen on them otherwise
there would be a load of SFNs and they'd be selling off more spectrum!

Regional broadcasting, existing grouped aerials, unsuitability of
initial DVB-T parameters (still in use, but likely to change),
difficulty of getting relays to re-broadcast on-channel in most areas
(relay picks up its own signal, rather than the one supposedly feeding
it!) etc.

Simply, in most situations it's far easier and cheaper for a relay to
re-broadcast on a different frequency, rather than the same one.
Certainly changing that incurs a cost.

I suspect some elegant and not too expensive solutions could be found
if required. They've done it for DAB.

Cheers,
David.

2Bdecided wrote:

Regional broadcasting, existing grouped aerials, unsuitability of
initial DVB-T parameters (still in use, but likely to change),
difficulty of getting relays to re-broadcast on-channel in most areas
(relay picks up its own signal, rather than the one supposedly feeding
it!) etc.

Simply, in most situations it's far easier and cheaper for a relay to
re-broadcast on a different frequency, rather than the same one.
Certainly changing that incurs a cost.

True, but you could have all of a parent's relays using the same frequency,
but different to the parent's.

For instance

Parent Station:-

COM 1 Ch 21
COM 2 Ch 24
COM 3 Ch 27

All relays:-

COM 1 Ch 40
COM 2 Ch 43
COM 3 Ch 46


--
Mark
Please replace invalid and invalid with gmx and net to reply.

www.paras.org.uk

On Tue, 14 Apr 2009 09:05:37 -0700 (PDT), 2Bdecided wrote:

I realise CH4 is now FTA, but my understanding is that five isn't,

five is FTA now but not the other offerings of that stable.

--
Cheers
Dave.

The PSB multiplexes are more financially viable and make much more money
for a transmitter operator than a commercial multiplex ever will.
Even the equipment being installed at the transmitter sites for the COM
multiplexes is different to that being used for the three PSB multiplexes,
again a decision made by NGW before it merged with Arqiva.


It would be difficult for NGW to have made decisions about the future of PSB muxes when Arqiva had already won the contract to supply and operate them against NGW.


Obviously extra expenditure reduces profit (or increases loss), but
I'm not sure Arqiva are on the brink of bankruptcy.


Arqiva is owned Australian banking concern MacQuarie, they are rolling
in cash, unlike our own UK banks which get given cash by our own government
to bail them out of bad investments. Macquarie own loads of profitable
businesses around the UK and abroad.


If you read around you will find that one of the two Macquarie funds that own Arqiva (plus half of Airwave and (I think) all of Broadcast Australia) have recently been sold off to a Canadian Pension Fund. Does that indicate Macquarie are awash with cash?


--
Woody

harrogate three at ntlworld dot com

[snip]
So, a question: if you're stuck on a relay tx, with no digital now and
Halfview due in a few years, what is the best option for a PVR, both
now and in the future?
[snip]


This may seem a daft question, but what is Halfview? Google doesn't know
anything about it.




--
Woody

harrogate three at ntlworld dot com

In article ,
Woody wrote:
[snip]
So, a question: if you're stuck on a relay tx, with no digital now and
Halfview due in a few years, what is the best option for a PVR, both
now and in the future?
[snip]


This may seem a daft question, but what is Halfview? Google doesn't know
anything about it.

3 out of 6 possible muxes?

--
From KT24 - in "Leafy Surrey"

Using a RISC OS computer running v5.11